← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13698/2025granted

Arun @ Arunpandi v. The State Of Tamilnadu,

2025-10-13Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy4 pages

CRL OP(MD) NO. 13698 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD) NO. 13698 of 2025

1. Arun @ Arunpandi

2. MANI @ VEERASAMY Petitioner(s) Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

Crime No.165 of 2025.

Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.T.Udhayajeeva For Respondent(s): Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.side) For Intervenor : Mr.G.Murugendran Prayer:

C-8 AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.165 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER: The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS which was altered into Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 109 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.165 of 2025,

on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 20.07.2025, the accused persons way laid the defacto complainant's son near Uchipuli Cinema Theatre and threatened with dire consequences for not giving vehicle savari to them. On the same day, the accused persons attacked the defacto complainant's son with iron rod. Hence, the apprehension of arrest. Hence, a case has been registered as against the petitioners. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.

side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the offences committed by the petitioners are serious in nature. Further, the injured has been discharged from the hospital and Accused Nos.1 and 2 have been already remanded and have been granted bail. 5.The learned Counsel appearing for the intervenor vehemently opposed for considering the anticipatory bail petition. He submitted that the respondent police has not conducted the investigation properly. Therefore, he has filed a petition in W.P. (MD)No.20427 of 2025 wherein this Court directed to add the offence under Section 307 of IPC.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact the injured was discharged, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ramanathapuram, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on further conditions that:

[a]the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity. [b]the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c]the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d]the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if

the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner is released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

[g]The petitioners shall not intimidate the victim and the petitioners cannot enter the street where the victim is residing, where the victim is working (office) and also where the victim is there.

13-10-2025 Tmg To

1. The Inspector of Police Uchipuli Police Station Ramanathapuram District

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ramanathapuram.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.